Re: domxml "nightmare" and suggestion

Actually, I'd rather see a w3c DOM compliant module than a makeshift DOM, which is what DOMXML seems to be. This would make a lot of things a lot easier, not to mention standard Medvitz Lukas Schroeder wrote: > On Sat, Apr 13, 2002 at 12:41:44PM +0200, Christian Stocker wrote: >> top issues... Personally I don't have much problems with this extension, >> but missing docu and the API as a moving target, is something which >> worries a lot of people. But one of the weakest things about domxml is >> IMHO that it promises a DOM-API, which it does not provide very >> consitently and a lot of functionality is still missing. >> >> With all this points, i'd like to start a discussion about starting from >> scratch with the DOM-API in PHP. Maybe creating a new extension to avoid >> problems with all the people using domxml already (and therefore not >> relying on keeping the old API). >> >> Ideas, thoughts, etc? > > i'd rather see an effort of finally getting domxml itself into a mature > state. it's about time, imho. > regarding the api, it's not that people could/should have relied upon a > stable domxml api. it's _still_ experimental and marked as such. i'm > running a patched[1] version of domxml for quite some time for > development to get the functionality i need(ed), too. > > let's whip this beast into shape. > > > [1] for patches see http://www.azzit.de/patches/php4/ > > > regards, > -lukas